(WOMENSENEWS)--Forty-six-year-old
Maggie Flanagan used to love
her work with newborns. When
monitors beeped hundreds of
times during a 12-hour shift
in the hospital nursery, she
responded swiftly, so as not
to let the noise damage the
ears of her tiny patients.

But every time
Flanagan stretched to quickly
hit a shoulder-height button
to quiet the machine, she
unwittingly inched closer
to a crippling injury. Combined
with a series of other repetitive
motions, Flanagan soon began
feeling pain in her back,
neck and shoulders that wouldn't
go away.

"We're
always responding to monitors
in health care," the
Tacoma, Wash., nurse told
Women's eNews in a telephone
interview. "I knew I
was having back strain, but
wasn't aware of the subtle
signs of repetitive motion
injury."

When she was
moving a monitor with another
nurse, she developed back
spasms. She was diagnosed
with a cornucopia of back-neck-and-shoulder
injuries that put her out
of work for eight months in
1999.

Ergonomic injuries
like hers, also known as musculoskeletal
disorders, occur more often
in the heavily female health-care
sector than any other industry,
according to the most recent
statistics from the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration.

Disproportionate
Affect on Women

It's a situation
that advocates say affects
a disproportionate number
of women. "One of every
nine ergonomic-related injuries
occurs in the health care
sector, and the health care
sector is predominantly women,"
said Bill Borwegen, occupational
health and safety director
for the 1.6 million members
of Service Employees International
Union.

Borwegen added
that state-funded insurance
payments often expire before
an employee is able to resume
work, compelling the injured
to apply for government-funded
disability payments. "You
and I as taxpayers end up
paying for their injuries."

Borwegen argues
that many of the injuries
would have been prevented
by Clinton-era workplace ergonomics
laws that the Bush administration,
upon taking office in January
2001, downgraded to voluntary
guidelines for employers.

"People
are being crippled, they end
up losing their jobs,"
he said in an interview from
the union's Washington, D.C.,
offices. "Injuries could
be dramatically reduced by
putting in place good ergonomic
programs that require the
use of mechanical lifting
and transfer devices."
Such devices, according to
Borwegan, would also benefit
patients, making them less
likely to be dropped and "less
prone to skin tears,"
which he described as a serious
medical hazard.

Depending
on Goodwill

Flanagan also
believes that voluntary guidelines
are inadequate. "Until
we get legislation that mandates
employers to identify and
eliminate hazards then we'll
always be dependent on the
goodwill of others for our
health and safety," the
nurse said.

Following her
injury in 1999, Flanagan was
not only out of work for those
difficult eight months. "When
I was injured, I wasn't injured
for the duration of my shift
alone," Flanagan said.
"I was injured 24-7 and
my husband basically became
a single parent. I couldn't
do any of the dressing, bathing
or feeding of my two sons--I
couldn't do anything."

Now, she is
back at her job, but putting
up with relentless pain. "I
love my job," she said.
"I still do it. I just
never thought helping people
take such good care of their
children would affect how
I'd be able to take care of
mine. I've grieved for that."

Difficult
Data Comparison

After changing
the way it gathers and classifies
data, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics has said that the
most current statistics on
workplace injuries can't be
compared to data from before
2001, making it difficult
to gauge how U.S. workplace
might have been affected by
the lack of ergonomics standards.

Gary Visscher,
deputy assistant secretary
at OSHA, said the agency is
doing what it can to encourage
employers to adhere to its
safety recommendations.

"In the
absence of a standard, we
have a very aggressive program
and we're working with a lot
of different people on addressing
ergonomic issues in their
own particular workplace."
Visscher said that many health
care facilities have self-imposed
ergonomics standards that
conform to official guidelines.

Visscher said
that between 1992 and 2001,
musculoskeletal injuries,
as a percentage of overall
injuries, ranged between 34
and around 35 percent. Currently,
he said, the figure stood
at 34 percent. "It's
certainly not gone up and
I think that's an important
indicator. We are doing better
in total injuries and we're
doing better in musculoskeletal
disorders."

No Improvement
Since 2001

Workers' advocates,
however, say that voluntary
standards do not appear to
be reducing injuries.

"Since
2001 nurses have continued
to become injured," said
Dr. Butch de Castro, senior
staff specialist for occupational
health and safety at the Washington,
D.C.-based American Nurses
Association. He added that
many nurses are leaving the
profession "because of
exposure to ergonomic hazards
in healthcare settings and
that is primarily due to patient
lifting or patient handling,
which is done manually."

A survey conducted
by the American Nurses Association's
Web site in 2001 found that
of 4,286 respondents, 2,166
nurses said they "often"
continue working despite experiencing
back pain, while 1,750 said
they "sometimes"
worked through pain. The survey
also found that a disabling
back injury was the second-leading
health concern among nurses,
ranking higher than AIDS or
hepatitis exposure from needle
sticks.

And the Bureau
of Labor Statistics annual
report on injuries in the
workplace for 2002, the most
recent year for which statistics
are available, indicated that
79,007 nursing aides, orderlies
and attendants reported injuries
that required days to be taken
off from work in 2002. Of
those, about 91 percent were
women. These workers, according
to the findings, were second
only to truck drivers in the
number of injuries reported
by vocation. They "predominantly
suffered sprains and strains
to their trunk (typically
their back), due to overexertion
related to lifting or moving
patients."

Clinton-era
workplace-safety regulations
aimed at preventing such injuries
went into effect on Jan. 16,
2001, after 10 years of research
and drafting. They required
6 million workplaces to educate
102 million workers about
the musculoskeletal risks
of certain job-related tasks,
while mandating businesses
to invest in new equipment,
furniture and practices in
instances where injuries were
reported.

Compliance costs
were estimated by OSHA to
reach $4.5 billion a year
while business lobbyists estimated
it would cost more than 10
times that much, $67 billion.
Days before leaving office,
Clinton signed the new regulations
into law. With Bush's pledge
of support, the Republican-led
Congress in 2001 revoked the
regulations.

Shaya Mohajer
is a graduate of the New York
University Graduate School
of Journalism and has written
for Newsday, The Orange County
Register, Women's eNews and
other publications.